Supreme Court Upholds Charges Under Section 326A IPC in Acid Attack Case

The Supreme Court, in its judgment dated September 7, 2018, in the case of Maqbool vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh, ruled that an acid attack resulting in a simple injury still attracts charges under Section 326A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Court held that the severity of injury does not determine the applicability of this provision but rather the nature of the act and the intention behind it.

Background of the Case

The case arose from an acid attack incident in Uttar Pradesh, where the accused, Maqbool, allegedly threw acid on the victim, causing injuries. The key issues before the Supreme Court were:

• Whether an injury caused by an acid attack must be grievous to attract Section 326A IPC.
• Whether a charge should be framed under Section 326B IPC instead of Section 326A IPC when the injury is classified as simple.

Legal Provisions Involved

Section 326A and Section 326B IPC were introduced by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, based on the J.S. Verma Committee Report. These provisions specifically deal with acid attacks:

Section 326A IPC:

“Whoever causes permanent or partial damage or deformity to, or burns or maims or disfigures or disables, any part or parts of the body of a person or causes grievous hurt by throwing acid on or by administering acid to that person, or by using any other means with the intention of causing or with the knowledge that he is likely to cause such injury or hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and with fine.”

Section 326B IPC:

“Whoever throws or attempts to throw acid on any person or attempts to administer acid to any person, or attempts to use any other means, with the intention of causing permanent or partial damage or deformity or burns or maiming or disfigurement or disability or grievous hurt to that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than five years but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.”

Arguments by the Petitioner (Maqbool)

The petitioner, Maqbool, argued:

• The injury caused to the victim was simple, as per the medical report.
• Section 326A IPC applies only when the injury is grievous.
• The charge should be altered to Section 326B IPC, which deals with attempts and lesser degrees of injury.
• Other High Courts, including Rajasthan and Madras, have ruled that simple injuries do not fall under Section 326A IPC.

Arguments by the Respondent (State of Uttar Pradesh)

The State of Uttar Pradesh countered:

• The legislative intent behind Section 326A IPC is to criminalize acid attacks, regardless of the extent of injury.
• The accused’s intention was to cause harm using acid, which is sufficient to attract Section 326A IPC.
• Acid attacks have severe physical, emotional, and social consequences, and the law should not be diluted based on the degree of injury.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court, comprising Justices Kurian Joseph and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, carefully examined the legal provisions and made the following key observations:

1. Section 326A IPC Does Not Require Grievous Hurt

The Court clarified that Section 326A IPC applies even if the injury is simple. The section mentions various types of harm, including permanent damage, burns, maiming, disfigurement, disability, or grievous hurt. The presence of grievous hurt is not a mandatory condition.

“Be it simple or grievous, if the injury falls under the specified types under Section 326A on account of the use of acid, the offence under Section 326A is attracted.”

2. Explanation Under Section 326B IPC

The Court noted that Section 326B IPC deals with attempts to commit an acid attack, whereas Section 326A IPC applies when acid has actually been used and caused injuries. The explanation under Section 326B IPC clarifies that permanent or partial damage or deformity does not need to be irreversible.

3. Misinterpretation by Lower Courts

The Supreme Court overruled decisions of the Rajasthan High Court and the Madras High Court, which had ruled that only grievous injuries attract Section 326A IPC.

“Both the High Court of Rajasthan in Laddu Ram v. State of Rajasthan and the High Court of Madras in M. Siluvai Murugan v. State do not lay down the correct position of law and are overruled.”

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled:

• The appeal by the accused was dismissed.
• The trial court was correct in framing charges under Section 326A IPC.
• The accused could not seek discharge merely because the injury was simple.
• Other observations made in this case should not influence the trial court during the actual proceedings.

Implications of the Judgment

This ruling has significant implications for criminal law and the protection of acid attack victims.

1. Strengthening Acid Attack Laws

The judgment reinforces that acid attacks are serious offenses, regardless of the extent of injury.

2. Deterrent Against Acid Attacks

By upholding stringent punishment under Section 326A IPC, the ruling sends a strong message that acid attacks will not be taken lightly.

3. Judicial Clarity

The decision settles the confusion among various High Courts and ensures uniform application of the law.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in Maqbool vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh is a landmark ruling that clarifies the application of Section 326A IPC in acid attack cases. By holding that even simple injuries fall under this provision, the Court has strengthened the legal framework for acid attack victims and reinforced the seriousness of such crimes. This ruling upholds justice for victims and ensures that perpetrators are punished appropriately.

Petitioner Name: Maqbool.
Respondent Name: The State of Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment By: Justice Kurian Joseph, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul.
Place Of Incident: Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 07-09-2018.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Maqbool vs The State of Uttar P Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 07-09-2018.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Attempt to Murder Cases
See all petitions in Custodial Deaths and Police Misconduct
See all petitions in SC/ST Act Case
See all petitions in Judgment by Kurian Joseph
See all petitions in Judgment by Sanjay Kishan Kaul
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments September 2018
See all petitions in 2018 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category